crobatoI am also thinking that even with the Chinese radar, you would still need the SKM upgrade to fire the SD-10. I think it’s possible to do this. The implications of integrating SD-10 on the N001VEP radar is obvious since it will allow the MKK to use the SD-10 as well.
I’m also thinking that the late block SU-27UBKs and the J-11s might also be equipped with a subset of the N001VEP, perhaps just the N001VE. In the N001VEP, you got two seperate weapons control subsystems, SUV-VE and SUV-P, that is added on the N001. SUV-VE controls the R-77, while SUV-P adds the precision ground attack function. The late block SU-27UBKs and the J-11s may be fitted with the SUV-VE, which enables them to use the R-77 mode, but not anything else. Doing this is an easy upgrade, and it lays an easy foundation where the entire system can be fully upgraded by adding the SUV-P components. There has been a few reports that the last batch of SU-27UBKs may be upgraded.
[quote]
Kanwa News March 10th 2001> Source form the Russian Air Force recently confirmed that Su27UBK fighters have been deployed in China’s Chengdu Military Command. The source said that on December 22 2000, 8 Su27UBKs flew to Chongqing from Irkutsk, indicating that Chengdu Military Command has started to obtain the latest model fighters after Nanjing Military Command.
The purpose of this deploy in Chongqing is obviously directed at India to some extent. Due to the adverse climatic conditions, Su27 may not be deployed directly in Qinghai or Xizang (Tibet) close to the China-India border, and Chongqing is 1600km from Lhasa and 950km form Changdu in Tibet respectively. The Su27 in Chongqing can give necessary support to the Nanjing Military Command in the future battle against Taiwan and it also suggests that Chongqing will possibly become an important training base for Su27 fighters. It is reported that the modified N001E radar systems on the newest batch of Su27UBK deployed in the Chinese air force have undergone some improvement. The fire control mission computer has been reprogrammed, enabling the aircraft to guide R77 active radar guided missiles when necessary.
crobatoNewsmax is just desperate at their thinning audience.
crobatohttp://www.sinodefence.com/airforce/airdefence/ks1.asp
Pretty no-frills compared to competitors, really. I’m surprised it was delayed in favor of S-300; it’s nowhere near the same class, so why was it considered as a viable alternative? Heck, Buk-M2 has more impressive stats than that, and it was never intended to do the job of S-300P or S-300V.
KS-1A is only intended as an intermediete range missile, in the Buk class. 50km is the slant range by the way, not ballistic. HQ-9 is the main theatre defense SAM, an ARH missile with a range of 200km (most probably ballistic); FT-2000 is the export version with a passive head with a slant range of 100km. HH-9 is the naval variant of this missile for the new Chinese destroyers, range is 120km.
crobato” crobato, your theory is most interesting- what would clinch it would be a picture of an Su-27SK with IFR probe and offset IRST, as on the Su-27SM. However, maybe they left that part out.”
I’m not sure if they would opt for the IFR probe. The PLAAF got IFR on the MKKs and J-8Ds but aside from a few pictures, there is little evidence they have been training mid air refueling intensively, and my guess its not high in the list of priorities. J-10 and JH-7A also lacks any visible IFR.
That would make all the changes difficult to spot as all the changes would be internal. If there are verifiable reports of exercises of the J-11 simulating ARH missiles and SEAD missions, this would give stronger clues. A more definite confirmation would be if a PLAAF SU-27 or J-11 would be spotted with an R-77 or Kh-31, indicating an SKM upgrade, or if it has an SD-10, then an indigenous upgrade.
” I personally think the SMT upgrades for the Migs makes more sense as they reduce operational costs by such a margin they will actually end up saving them money as well as making them more effective.”
I think the SKM upgrades are more cost effective as they retain the antenna and the existing radar, instead of removing them completely, The SKM upgrade adds components and electronics upon an existing system. It’s a hack, and a very clever one at that.
The SMT upgrade would have required a brand new Zhuk radar set and FCS, which would cost a lot more. Or you may opt for the N019M, which can retain the existing antenna but add more modern electronic components. But for the same amount of complexity and cost, the N001VEP gives you a better performance output than the N019M. Plus all the testing has been paid for by the MKK program, you don’t need to perform another series of certification tests.
crobatoIt’s hard to imagine why they will still accept the basic SU-27SK form with a radar and cockpit layout that is stone age compared to their domestic production. I mean, look even their low end FC-1 (which I think will be named just plain J-17 in Chinese service) is going to get at least, some slotted planar radar, MFDs in the cockpit, and an FCS capable of shooting an ARH missile.
My opinion remains that they were upgrading planes since 2001, then told the Russians to shut up about it, to deny or simply appear this was still in negotiation. There is a strong tactical potential for letting the opponent underestimate your aircraft, especially if it’s an SU-27. If you’re on the other end, and you think you’re going to engage a basic SU-27SK with the old radar and AA-10 missiles, imagine how lethal that mistake can be if the so called SU-27 actually has an enhanced radar that is shooting R-77s at you.
It’s also funny if some of the exercises the SU-27s are involved have them shooting long range ARH missiles, or doing SEAD missions attacking radar sites with ARMs. Those things are not in the ability of the basic SK radar.
It has all the makings of an “assasin’s mace”. Anything in the PLA arsenal that has the makings of an assasin’s mace—something to knock you over the head when you least expect it—are closely guarded secrets. A PLAAF general who was head of a military academy is going to get shot for spying for Taiwan’s intelligence. He was specifically trying to dig secrets about the SU-27s. So we may not know for sure until the PLAAF decides to declassify. I mean it took the PLAAF four years to finally officially admit they got R-77s—the photo of R-77s with the SU-30MKK 16 only came out this year when Jane’s had reported the Chinese buying R-77s in a first batch of 100 missiles in 2000. In the meantime, Vympel (the missile company) never officially said a word admitting it.
It is also possible that they may have skipped the entire SKM process entirely, removing the old radars from their planes and installing them with the new domestic radar, most possibly a KLJ variant of the ones used on the J-10 and J-8II. This upgrade goes further than the SKM upgrade since it would remove the entire twist cassegrain antenna and replace it with at least a slotted planar array (if you’re optimistic a phase array is possible). Domestic HUD and MFDs are added into a new glass cockpit.
Another way to look at it, is that the SKM upgrade for the PLAAF may be transitory, limited to perhaps for the duration of the 200 plane licensed run, and then they will shift to the “J-11A” or “J-11B”, where they will incorporate their own engines and radars.
crobatoA lot of the decisions in the RuAF are politically motivated and heavy of favoritism. One general may favor this factory complex while another favors that. The previous head of the air force was funding multiple upgrade programs concurrently for over a decade: SU-27UBM, SU-30, SU-30K/KN, SU-30MK, SU-32/34, SU-35, SU-37, SU-27SMK, MiG-29SMT, MiG-29M1/M2, etc,. All without much result and overstretching resources. It also appeared he was biased to the Irkut factory, and was pushing the SU-30KN/SU-27UBM plan.
The new head of the air force was much more practical. He took the only thing that was fully certified and developed—the SU-30MKK—and adapted that into an upgrade. Better yet, that development was already being financed by the Chinese, who not just paid for the MKK’s development, but also was paying to adapt the same techs on their SU-27SK/J-11 as an upgrade. So it didn’t cost the RuAF a lot of development pennies on this one. The Russian SKM upgrades probably has a few extras the Chinese upgrades didn’t have, as the Chinese probably ordered only the upgrades they need for a lower cost. The upgrades merely added electronic components to the radar and avionics, replaced only a few, retained the antenna, and added a new cockpit.
crobato.. this number really makes me wonder especially when F-16s are rumored for fatigue cracks.. I also do not really understand why the latest versions should feature improved airframe life over the basic Alpha types (as Crobato has pointed) when all upgrades basically mean more fuel, more stores and more weight..
It was the F-16A that suffered fatigue cracks.
The F-16C had the strengthening and the so called 8,000 hour airframe life, but at the expense of weight—7000kg for the F-16A bumping up to 8,500kg for the F-16C (add 300kg more if the F-16C has the GE engine).
The result was a considerable loss in agility—the original F-16As were better flyers.
The F-16C Block 60 goes up to over 9,000kg, and the Japanese F-2 weighs a staggering 9,500kg empty.
crobatoIt’s possible that you have one design, then reprogram it to suit different engines.
crobatoWow 12000 hours, what’s the designated total airframe life for a jet like Mig-29M? Western jets seem to last much longer and are usually cheaper to run and more fuel efficient.
I would say an MBTO is 2000 flight hours is likely, as this could be standard Russian policy, and the airframe can endure a few major overhauls. The survivability of the airframe depends on each inspection.
However, I don’t see any need for 12,000 total airframe life. The Russian planes are not doing in any expeditionary campaigns invading and bombing other countries a few times every decade, not like the US. It sounds mocking but that is the truth. The F-16s are a lot busier and have to work harder, especially as they often have the strike role. So they have to be built for it.
crobatoper the link below F-16 airframe life is 8000 hrs
http://www.danshistory.com/f16.htmlI think what it means is after 2000hrs a Flanker has to be extensively
overhauled, taken apart , all components checked and weakened parts
replaced to reset the airframe life ?
Yes like that too.
At the same time, this is often taken as the opportunity to overhaul the engine as well, or replace it if needed. That’s way the AL-31F engines have an MBTO of 1000 to 1500 hours.
Here is one thing I noticed. This is observing from the PLAAF.
The first 24 SU-27s they received were about in the 1992-1993 period, with the contract signed on 1991.
Last year, we got pics of SU-27s in a big overhaul maintenance depot in China. No secret, the pics were published in public. I think one of the bort numbers was 16 and another was clearly identified as 24. These are planes belonging to this first batch that was recieved in 1992-1993.
So 2000 hours of MBTO gives you a max 10 years before you need to extensively overhaul it, if you average at the rate of 200 flight hours per year. I get the impression that’s how much each PLAAF SU-27 does their work regardless of the pilot sitting in it. Please note that this has nothing to do with the pilot hours, as the planes are likely to be shared among a pool of pilots.
I beleive that the SU-27 can do major overhauls a few times, before the airframe is junked.
crobatowhat’s the service life of other contemporary combat aircraft in the west?
I don’t know. But total airframe life of an F-16C is about 8,000 flight hours, 12,000 hours in later models. This is the entire duration of life of an aircraft, not MBTO.
crobatoDifferent engine? I don’t think so. I think they still have to insert the engine. Look inside the place where the nozzles should be. The colour is not likely the colour of the afterburner section. And besides that I don’t think that the plane almost not variable geometry. Huge inlet… Huge engine… And such unmoveable exit? I thin it is just finished new plane (look at the colour of the metall what you think that it is a nozzle). Shining new.
Well it is a new plane, so it has new paint.
I thought about the plane as something that didn not have its engines on.
The problem with that, if you look at the AL-31F, after the nozzle, the metal ring next to it is still part of the engine, not the plane itself. and if you don’t have the engine, that part would be gone as well.
Second thing. The engine is already in a painted condition and being carted from a field. As you can often see in countless pictures, many Chinese made planes are already flying with completely functional engines and yet they’re still unpainted. Painting is often the very last part to finish the plane.
If the plane does not have its engines, it’s likely to be inside a maintenance depot with its tail section removed, waiting for a new engine.
The section next to the nozzle blades still appear to be metal to me, with a bluish tint. AL-31Fs are often like that too. Might be the hue of the alloy.
This new engine appears shorter, but might have a larger diameter. Its rest position may be completly open like this. Note that J-10 1013 above has its nozzles open while at rest. I’m not saying the J-10 has WS-10A, no, I’m just pointing out the J-10 1013 as an example of how the engine nozzles may be at rest.
I look at both the engines, and it’s not just one engine but both.
crobatoSo 700+300=1000 hours is the airframe life of the Su-30K, is it?
More like “service life” which is the term Russians use. This is not airframe life I warn you, as many people get confused with the term. Service life would be MTBO or Mean Time Before Overhauls in the West.
Actual airframe life should be a few times of the service life. It should be 2000 hours, not 1000 hours btw, as I remember the SU-30MKK was rated 2000 hours service life, so I may assume that’s the standard for modern Flankers.
crobatoSMART HUD happens to work with the helmet targeting system on the left. It’s in English, so it’s likely to be an export product.
crobatoIndeed one nozzle is shorter than the other. Indeed it could be WS-10A. Let’s see if more J-11s pop up with this nozzle.
Be careful not to apply the same conclusions on the J-10 however. The production J-10s are still using AL-31FNs, and these production J-10s have slightly shorter nozzles than the prototypes, implying that the production AL-31FNs got shorter nozzles. This may make it more difficult to visually detect if the J-10 transitions to the WS-10A.
Sign In
